US District Court for the Western District of Kentucky Prisoner Petitions Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 5,483
Rogers v. The Daviess County Detention Center
as 4:2024cv00133
Plaintiff:
Quin J. Rogers
Defendant:
The Daviess County Detention Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Long v. Bradley
as 4:2024cv00132
Respondent:
David Bradley
Petitioner:
Elbert Phillip Long
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
ERB v. McCoy et al
as 4:2024cv00131
Defendant:
Doctor McCoy, Southern Health Partners and Nurse Nicki
Plaintiff:
Phillip ERB
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mitchell v. Comprehensive Correctional Care
as 5:2024cv00180
Plaintiff:
Cindy Mitchell
Defendant:
Comprehensive Correctional Care
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Christian v. USA
as 3:2024cv00694
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Brandon Christian
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Bussell v. Shafer 219 et al
as 5:2024cv00178
Defendant:
Officer Flood 423, Trooper Thomas 309 and Officer Shafer 219
Plaintiff:
Barry L. Bussell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Seal 1 v. USA
as 1:2024cv00139
Petitioner:
Charleslenzeo Sanchez Williams
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Okum v. Smith et al
as 5:2024cv00176
Respondent:
Adam Smith and Christian County Jail
Petitioner:
Kevin Michael Okum
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 st Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Okum v. Smith
as 5:2024cv00177
Petitioner:
Kevin Michael Okum
Respondent:
Jailer Adam Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Tyler v. McKenzie
as 4:2024cv00125
Petitioner:
Isaiah Tyler
Respondent:
Warden Shawn McKenzie
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
